The Need for a Vena Cava Filter in Oncological Patients with Acute Venous Thrombosis: A Marker of a Worse Prognosis

Carregando...
Imagem de Miniatura
Citações na Scopus
7
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2019
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
Citação
ANNALS OF VASCULAR SURGERY, v.60, p.35-44, 2019
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Background: Active cancer is found in approximately 20% of patients diagnosed with venous thromboembolism. This condition is more prevalent in patients with advanced and metastatic cancer and is the second largest cause of death among patients with active neoplasm. Many of them have contraindication for anticoagulation and needs an inferior vena cava filter to be implanted, but a large proportion of these patients have very low survival after filter implantation. Our aim was to verify whether the need for filter implantation represents an independent indicator of poor prognosis in oncological patients and to identify subgroups with a greater survival. Methods: This study included a retrospective analysis of 247 oncologic patients with acute proximal venous thrombosis. We compared survival between 100 consecutive patients who needed vena cava filter (FILTER group) versus a control group of 147 patients in whom anticoagulation was possible (ANTICOAGULATION group). We verified survival, cause of death, filter's indications (clinical and surgical), and factors that might lead to worse prognosis. Results: Risk of death was 8.83-fold higher in the FILTER group than that in the ANTICOAGULATION group, a greater risk than the presence of metastasis (OR: 2.47). Death was significantly more frequent in patients subjected to filter implantation because of clinical indications (93.2%) such as high risk of or recent bleeding and an adjusted risk of death of 2.24-fold higher in a multivariate analysis. Conclusions: The need to implant a vena cava filter in a patient with cancer is a marker that indicates patient's disease severity and worse prognosis. Survival was longer in the subgroup of patients who underwent filter implantation before oncologic surgery, probably because of a better status performance and less clinical complications.
Palavras-chave
Referências
  1. Abdel-Razeq H, 2011, THER CLIN RISK MANAG, V7, P99, DOI 10.2147/TCRM.S17912
  2. Akl EA, 2008, CANCER-AM CANCER SOC, V113, P1685, DOI 10.1002/cncr.23814
  3. Akl EA, 2008, J EXP CLIN CANC RES, V27, DOI 10.1186/1756-9966-27-21
  4. Barginear MF, 2009, CLIN APPL THROMB-HEM, V15, P263, DOI 10.1177/1076029608315165
  5. Brunson A, 2017, THROMB RES, V153, P57, DOI 10.1016/j.thromres.2017.03.012
  6. CANTELMO NL, 1982, CANCER, V50, P341, DOI 10.1002/1097-0142(19820715)50:2<341::AID-CNCR2820500230>3.0.CO;2-C
  7. Dewdney SB, 2011, GYNECOL ONCOL, V121, P344, DOI 10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.01.004
  8. Jarrett BP, 2002, J VASC SURG, V36, P704, DOI 10.1067/mva.2002.127958
  9. Kakkar AK, 2010, BRIT J CANCER, V102, pS1, DOI 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605598
  10. Krutman Mariana, 2013, J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord, V1, P370, DOI 10.1016/j.jvsv.2013.04.002
  11. Mahmood SS, 2017, AM J MED, V130, P77, DOI 10.1016/j.amjmed.2016.06.048
  12. Mansour Asem, 2014, Hematol Oncol Stem Cell Ther, V7, P136, DOI 10.1016/j.hemonc.2014.09.005
  13. Matei DE, 2001, HEMOSTASIS THROMBOSI, P16
  14. Noble S, 2014, THROMB RES, V133, pS133, DOI 10.1016/S0049-3848(14)50023-0
  15. Piazza G, 2007, CHEST, V132, p499S
  16. Pignataro BS, 2016, CLIN APPL THROMB HEM, V158
  17. Ramacciotti E, 2003, THROMB RES, V109, P171, DOI 10.1016/S0049-3848(03)00179-8
  18. Schunn Christian, 2006, Vasc Endovascular Surg, V40, P287, DOI 10.1177/1538574406291821
  19. Schwarz RE, 1996, J CLIN ONCOL, V14, P652, DOI 10.1200/JCO.1996.14.2.652
  20. Wallace MJ, 2004, CANCER, V101, P1902, DOI 10.1002/cncr.20578
  21. Wolosker N, 2016, CLIN APPL THROMB-HEM, V22, P377, DOI 10.1177/1076029615621999
  22. Zerati Antonio Eduardo, 2005, Clinics, V60, P361, DOI 10.1590/S1807-59322005000500003